Simon Josefsson <[email protected]> writes: > No, not like now. Today we and our users can chose to download non-free > content if they want. Some do. Some don't. With Steve's proposal, as > I understand it, that choice will be taken away.
So, just to see if I understand, the part that you're specifically objecting to is the willingness of the installer to load non-free firmware before starting to prompt the user for their preferences, combined with the lack of an installer that has no non-free firmware in it? My understanding of the proposal is that the point of loading firmware as needed is to get graphics and sound working early for accessibility reasons. I personally do consider that more important than ensuring that no non-free software is ever used, but I can certainly see why this would be a point of principled disagreement. Is that the part that you're objecting to? Or is it the mere presence of non-free software in the installer image, even if you're prompted before any of it is used? Or something else? There are certainly arguments in favor of maintaining an entirely DFSG-free installer. I don't think anyone would deny that; I think the only dispute there is over whether the benefits of having that installer around exceed the costs of maintaining it and explaining to users which one to pick. (And like any other work tradeoff, presumably the tradeoff would look differently the more people volunteer to help.) -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
